Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-24 Thread daveg
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:41:07PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > daveg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Are we talking about the same patch? > > Maybe not --- I thought you were talking about a backend-side behavioral > change. > > > Because I don't know what you are > > refering to with "timer managem

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-24 Thread Tom Lane
daveg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Are we talking about the same patch? Maybe not --- I thought you were talking about a backend-side behavioral change. > Because I don't know what you are > refering to with "timer management code" and "scheduling the interrupt" in > the context of pg_dump. I'm

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-24 Thread daveg
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 05:34:50PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > daveg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > lock-timeout sets statement_timeout to a small value while locks are being > > taken on all the tables. Then it resets it to default. So it could reset it > > to whatever the new default is. > > "rese

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-24 Thread Tom Lane
daveg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > lock-timeout sets statement_timeout to a small value while locks are being > taken on all the tables. Then it resets it to default. So it could reset it > to whatever the new default is. "reset to default" is *surely* not the right behavior; resetting to the set

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-24 Thread daveg
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 07:30:53PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > daveg wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 06:51:28PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Alex Hunsaker wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Joshua D. Drake escribi?:

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-24 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Alex Hunsaker wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I would like to get do this without adding a new --use-statement-timeout > >> flag. Is anyone going to want to honor statement_timeout during > >> pg_dump/pg_restore? I

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-24 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Alex Hunsaker wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I would like to get do this without adding a new --use-statement-timeout flag. Is anyone going to want to honor statement_timeout during pg_dump/pg_restore? I thought we were just going to disable it

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-24 Thread Bruce Momjian
Alex Hunsaker wrote: > On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I would like to get do this without adding a new --use-statement-timeout > > flag. Is anyone going to want to honor statement_timeout during > > pg_dump/pg_restore? I thought we were just going to

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-23 Thread Alex Hunsaker
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would like to get do this without adding a new --use-statement-timeout > flag. Is anyone going to want to honor statement_timeout during > pg_dump/pg_restore? I thought we were just going to disable it. I believe so.

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-23 Thread Bruce Momjian
daveg wrote: > On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 06:51:28PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Alex Hunsaker wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Joshua D. Drake escribi?: > > > > > > > > > That is an interesting idea. Something like: > > > > > >

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-23 Thread daveg
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 06:51:28PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Alex Hunsaker wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Joshua D. Drake escribi?: > > > > > > > That is an interesting idea. Something like: > > > > > > > > pg_restore -E "SET ST

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-06-23 Thread Bruce Momjian
Alex Hunsaker wrote: > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Joshua D. Drake escribi?: > > > > > That is an interesting idea. Something like: > > > > > > pg_restore -E "SET STATEMENT_TIMEOUT=0; SET MAINTENANCE_WORK_MEM=1G" ? > > > > We already have it -

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

2008-04-16 Thread Alex Hunsaker
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joshua D. Drake escribió: > > > That is an interesting idea. Something like: > > > > pg_restore -E "SET STATEMENT_TIMEOUT=0; SET MAINTENANCE_WORK_MEM=1G" ? > > We already have it -- it's called PGOPTIONS. > Ok but is n